"Nowadays people know the price of everything and the value of nothing."

Oscar Wilde, /The Picture of Dorian Gray, 1890///

//
On 01/07/2013 18:00, Steve Tockey wrote:
> Bertrand,> The silliest thing in all of this is that the stakeholders are clearly> clueless about the true source of cost in their software projects. We've> actually measured the degree of rework (fixing things that were done> incorrectly earlier, simply, waste) in software organizations to be over> 50%. I've got a technical paper on the topic, if anyone wants. I don't> believe I can include attachments on this list, so if anyone wants just> email me direct and I'll sent it back as a PDF attachment.>> The root issue here is that corporate accounting systems lie. They are> *cost* accounting systems, not *value* accounting systems. They are great> for measuring how much money was spent, but they fail miserably at> measuring how much money was saved.>> The corporate accounting systems will surely measure the cost of doing> everything we're talking about on the list recently. But tell me where the>> accounting system measures how much was saved because we did it a better> way? It doesn't. It can't. So the key problem underneath all of this is an>> inability for the stakeholders to really see and appreciate the economic> impacts of what's being discussed here. I'm convinced that if they had a> clue of the value of doing things better, they'd demand that it be done> that way.>>> -- steve>>>> -----Original Message-----> From: "RICQUE Bertrand (SAGEM DEFENSE SECURITE)"> <bertrand.ricque_at_xxxxxx
> Date: Monday, July 1, 2013 2:05 AM> To: "systemsafety_at_xxxxxx
> <systemsafety_at_xxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [SystemSafety] The "Real world" [was: Qualifying SW as> "proven in use"]>> I agree and I am afraid that we are just requested to stop bothering> stakeholders by raising issues understood as costs.>> Bertrand RICQUE> Program Manager, Optronics and Defense Division> > T +33 (0)1 58 11 96 82> M +33 (0)6 87 47 84 64> 23 avenue Carnot> 91300 MASSY - FRANCE> http://www.sagem-ds.com>> >>> -----Original Message-----> From: systemsafety-bounces_at_xxxxxx
> [mailto:systemsafety-bounces_at_xxxxxx
> Thomas> Sent: Monday, July 01, 2013 10:56 AM> Cc: systemsafety_at_xxxxxx
> Subject: [SystemSafety] The "Real world" [was: Qualifying SW as "proven in> use"]>> On 01/07/2013 01:01, Les Chambers wrote:>> I encourage the>> brains trust on this list to engage with the aggressive ugliness that is>> the>> real world and consider how we might deal with it.> I recall a lecture given by Dijkstra in 1973. A member of the audience> asked " do your methods work on real world problems?" Dijkstra paused,> and then said quietly "real world problems. Ah yes, those that remain> when you have failed to apply all the known solutions".>> Over the years, I have heard many excuses for failures to use> professional engineering methods.>> "if we train the programmers, they'll leave for a better paid job".> "we can't hire programmers who are willing to use that programming> language"> "universities don't teach (maths, project management, quality control,> planning, team working ... ...)"> "the customer insists that we use this (buggy) middleware for> compatibility"> "modern software isn't written - it's assembled from lots of (buggy) COTS">> "if we try to include that in the standard, industry will revolt."> "if we were to ask for that evidence, industry would charge us a fortune">> ... and many many more.>> Most software developers appear to have lost sight of the problem. Every> week, I hear someone use the verb "test" when what they mean is "gain> assurance that ... is fit for purpose"; this reveals a dangerous,> implicit assumption that "test-and-fix" is the only practical way to> develop software. Most software is still written in languages without> good data structures and strong type-checking. Most software> requirements (and even interface specifications) are written in English> (or another natural language) - perhaps with some diagrams that lack any> rigorous semantics. Most projects have grossly inadequate change> control. I rarely see a risk register that is worth anything (except as> a demonstration that the project manager isn't managing the project).>> Is there another trade that (a) builds complex, novel and critical> systems using poorly-qualified staff, (b) almost exclusively uses tools> that have major known defects, (c) builds systems from components of> unknown provenance that cannot be shown to be fit for purpose and (d)> nevertheless claims to be professional engineers?>> Surely it is self-evident that the current state of our profession is> unsustainable. Let's stop making excuses and look for ways to accelerate> the changes that we know are needed.>> (Which may be what Les was saying in the extract quoted above).>> Martyn>>>>>>> _______________________________________________> The System Safety Mailing List> systemsafety_at_xxxxxx
> #> " Ce courriel et les documents qui lui sont joints peuvent contenir des> informations confidentielles ou ayant un caractère privé. S'ils ne vous> sont pas destinés, nous vous signalons qu'il est strictement interdit de>> les divulguer, de les reproduire ou d'en utiliser de quelque manière que>> ce soit le contenu. Si ce message vous a été transmis par erreur, merci> d'en informer l'expéditeur et de supprimer immédiatement de votre système> informatique ce courriel ainsi que tous les documents qui y sont attachés."> ******> " This e-mail and any attached documents may contain confidential or> proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are> notified that any dissemination, copying of this e-mail and any> attachments thereto or use of their contents by any means whatsoever is> strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please> advise the sender immediately and delete this e-mail and all attached> documents from your computer system."> #>> _______________________________________________> The System Safety Mailing List> systemsafety_at_xxxxxx
>> _______________________________________________> The System Safety Mailing List> systemsafety_at_xxxxxx
>>> -----> No virus found in this message.> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com> Version: 2013.0.3345 / Virus Database: 3204/6452 - Release Date: 06/30/13>>>